BEST of HA: Luke Esser fucks pigs

[In a fit of nostalgia (and laziness), I’m marking my remaining days here on HA by posting links to some of my favorite and most influential posts. If you have favorites you’d like to see, please let me know.]

Luke Esser is a former state senator and the current Washington State Republican Party chair, and yet Google his name, and this is perennially one of the top links you’ll find. And I couldn’t be more proud. Read the whole thing.

Share:

Related

Comments

I understand that it was an attempt at parady (or satire, I always get the two confused). As such, it makes a valid point that just because an ethics complaint has been filed, it doesn’t mean that it’s valid. Conspiring to manufacture an ethics complaint right before an election so that it can be used in robo-calls is a particularly obnoxious dirty trick.

But having said that, I don’t like the idea that I can’t refer this post to others (kids, parents, relatives) due to the language of the message.

And by admitting it was maliscious, you’ve pretty much managed to give Essner a big step up if he decided to sue you for libel. Sure, comments about public officials are generally protected by the first amendment, but not if the plaintiff can prove that they are maliscious.

When did I admit it was malicious? That aside, it would be absolutely hilarious for Esser to attempt to bring a libel suit, as amongst other things, he’d have to prove I’ve damaged his reputation, which of course would require proving that some people might reasonably believe based on this post that he does indeed fuck pigs.

And FYI, one of the reasons I love this post is because it is simultaneously incredibly crude and very deep. It is a post about satire, as much as it is satire itself, and I find that very intellectually satisfying.

3

Zotz sez: This space available! Previous wingnut tenant leaves to spend more time with his goat(s)!spews:

Speaking of trying to distort the message, the Arizona gun lobby and it’s ardent supporters are doubling down after last weekend’s shootings in Tuscon.

While there are calls nationwide to prohibit the sale of semi-automatic weapons and restrict a gun’s clip capacity, in Arizona they are claiming that if everyone in the crowd had a gun, then the shooter wouldn’t have gotten off his second shot. As evidence, they point to Joe Zamudio, who was armed when he ran from a nearby convenience store to the scene and helped to disarm the shooter. Bieng armed gave him the confidence to deal with the attacker, they claim.

But that’s not the whole story, by a long shot. Zamudio had no firearms training other than what his father had taught him. He didn’t teach him too well, aparantly, as he took the safety off his pistol while he was exiting the store and it was still in his pocket. At that point, running toward the scene while holding a pistol in his pocket with the safety off, Zamudio was just as likely to shoot himself or anyone else as he was the victim.

As he arrived at the scene, he came around a corner and confronted a man holding a gun. “Drop it”, he ordered, and then he grabbed the guy and slammed him into a wall. But he admits that he was only a fraction of a second away from shooting him instead of grabbing him. He also admits he was fortunate that he didn’t shoot the guy, because the man holding the gun was not the shooter – he had just taken the gun away from the shooter.

The second correct decision he made was not to draw the gun out of his pocket, which he said was because he didn’t want to be confused as being a “second shooter”. In the confusion of such an event, anyone with a gun is likely to be considered a potential threat, either by others in the crowd with guns, or by police officers arriving on the scene. The prospect of a multi-party gun battle between various armed people in a crowd, each believing the others to be the instigator, is an event to be avoided.

I will mention that I’ve had occassion to think about these things before. My pastor had received some threats to him and his family, and some of us in the church had been quietly warned and asked to look out for “anything suspicious”. The next week I noticed that the guy in front of me had a pistol tucked into a holster in the small of his back, which was visable only when he reached back to pull out his wallet for the offering. I didn’t recognize the guy, so I kept an eye on him. If he stood up, if he reached toward the gun at his back, at what point should I tackle the guy and attempt to disarm him?

At the first opportunity I stepped toward the back and told my concerns to the head usher. He told me not to worry – he was an off-duty policeman who the church had hired to be present for a few weeks, given the threats. I was relieved, but I also wondered what charges I might have been facing (or worse) if I had tried to disarm a police officer I had mistakenly believed to be a threat?

“What the robo-call refers to is an informal complaint filed by Esser buddy, contributor and former roommate George Aiton — a complaint that served as the direct inspiration for my own malicious missive.”

I get your point about Essner having to admit that his reputation was harmed by your posting. I’m sure he would be loath to have to assert, in public court filings, that a mere blogger could actually damage his reputation.

But now that you are becoming a member of the paid media, remember that being judgement-proof will no longer be an effective discouragement of those seeking to cut you down to size. Not only could they make life unpleasant for you by threatening to garnish your wages, but more importantly your employer would be the main target of their attacks. I’m not saying that you should back off, but just be a bit careful about the manner in which you say it. And if you have to question whether it exposes your employer to a lawsuit, then be sure it gets run by The Stranger’s legal rep before publishing.

By the way, I recognize your point about needing to give your full efforts to The Stranger. But could you arrange to at least have an open thread posted at least once a day? Once a topic gets above fifty posts, I’m reluctant to even open it.

Maliscious? Your spelling is maliscious, atroscious, and downright viscious! You spell so badly that you might be a secret facist!

By the way, obvious satire is generally protected by the First Amendment. Remember the lawsuit that Jerry Falwell lost against Larry Flint in the U.S. Supreme Court, where he has satirically accused of having sex with his mother in an outhouse?

@6 “As evidence, they point to Joe Zamudio, who was armed when he ran from a nearby convenience store to the scene and helped to disarm the shooter. Bieng armed gave him the confidence to deal with the attacker, they claim.”

It seems to me that since Zamudio didn’t shoot Loughner this negates their whole argument. I mean, what good is a gun, if you don’t use it?

Speaking of shooting people, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange called for prosecution of politicians and media figures who “incite murder.”

Assange specifically mentioned Fox commentator Bob Beckel, who encouraged the public to “illegally shoot” Assange, and Sarah Palin, who said the U.S. government should pursue Assange as if he were an Al Qaeda or Taliban leader.

The U.S., which has the world’s most protected drug market, and also the world’s highest drug prices (hmmm, wonder if there’s a connection?), is experiencing shortages of critical drugs so severe that patients are losing their lives as a result.

Roger Rabbit Commentary: When profit-driven companies can’t or won’t supply life-and-death drugs, maybe the government should intervene? I wonder if the pharmaceutical industry should be treated as regulated utilitiesy. After all, the government gives them monopoly status by granting drug patents. What if a private sewer company refused to provide sewer service because it wasn’t making enough money? Would state utility regulators let them do that? I don’t think so. How are life-saving drugs less important than sewers? When the profit incentive clearly isn’t enough, maybe we need to rethink our whole approach to maintaining necessary supplies of critical drugs.

Maliscious? Your spelling is maliscious, atroscious, and downright viscious! You spell so badly that you might be a secret facist!…”

Point taken, and I appreciate (sp?) the humor. But since this post doesn’t provide spell-check, it’s simply not going to get any better. My spelling has been attrocious (sp?) since grade school, and as I get older I find it’s actually getting worse. I used to try to type my posts in MS Word so I could spell-check them, but in the internet world that mean the post had become irrelevent (sp?) by the time I posted it, so I gave up.

Maliscious? Your spelling is maliscious, atroscious, and downright viscious! You spell so badly that you might be a secret facist!

With regard to the tawdry topic of Republican bestiality, does anyone know if Republicans who engage in such behavior tend to be faithful to a particular species, or do they consort with whatever poor beast might be available?

@15 Reminds me of a cartoon in Playboy magazine years ago. A naked guy with a gun holster strapped around his hip is staring out the window at a moonlit sky. The naked woman in bed says, “All right, you can wear it to bed, if it makes you feel like a man.”

@28: The preferred Republican animal appears to be goats. Googling it was fun! Ran across this:

Florida is one of only 16 states that still permit bestiality -– a fact that animal-rights activist and Sunrise Sen. Nan Rich learned to her horror when a Panhandle man three years ago was suspected of accidentally asphyxiating a family goat with which he was copulating.

What is it about having sex with animals that compulsively sticks in right-wingers’ heads? It’s an obsession with conservatives.

I remember when the freak known as Neal Horsley (Georgia R Gov candidate) famously admitted to having sex with farm animals to Alan Colmes a few years ago.

Is it true?” Colmes asked.

“Hey, Alan, if you want to accuse me of having sex when I was a fool, I did everything that crossed my mind that looked like I…”

AC: “You had sex with animals?”

NH: “Absolutely. I was a fool. When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule.”

AC: “I’m not so sure that that is so.”

NH: “You didn’t grow up on a farm in Georgia, did you?”

AC: “Are you suggesting that everybody who grows up on a farm in Georgia has a mule as a girlfriend?”

NH: It has historically been the case. You people are so far removed from the reality… Welcome to domestic life on the farm…”

Horsley:You experiment with anything that moves when you are growing up sexually. You’re naive. You know better than that… If it’s warm and it’s damp and it vibrates you might in fact have sex with it.”

I had read a discussion about how the gun-obsessed assert that if there were more good citizens with guns, then events like the Arizona shooting wouldn’t happen, because we’d all be armed to the teeth. As RHP very astutely points out above, the very armed and very untrained but well meaning fellow very nearly made matters much worse, and any assistance he provided had nothing to do with his gun.

Can you imagine what would have happened if a bunch of people at that event pulled out their ‘pieces’ and opened fire? It would have been a horrific caricature, emphasis on horrific.

There’s something not rational about the affinity for firearms – which is why I think it’s such a potent sociopolitical tool that is very effectively exploited. It’s not just about individual liberty and self-protection or any of the other ‘rational’ defenses put forward by gun advocates.

There’s something totemic about guns for many people – it’s symbolic in a very powerful and very personal way – guns are both literally and symbolically power objects, religious objects. Acting as a totem, or a touchstone, or a fetish, discussion about it is impossible on a rational level. There’s something about identity suffused with guns among a part of the populace that tends to be white and conservative and religious – and like those other affinities, is effectively used to manipulate via fear.

This gun thing is not unlike a drug – which is one reason why, I think, that there are so many guns awash in our society, and access to more is so zealously/violently protected – it is very anvantageous to get people focus on them, and the (not very real) threat that BIG GOVERNMENT is going to try to take them away – it’s ongoing crisis and a very effective mobilization tool.

32 In this last election, Florida moved significantly to the right. I wonder if the word is out among Rs who love animals that Florida welcomes them, rather than condemns them, so we’re seeing a lot of R emigration to Florida. I wonder, too, if the real reason Cynny doesn’t post here anymore is because he moved to Florida and just doesn’t have time to do anything but “love.”

“Baa Means No Goat Abuse 3.5″ Button (100 pack) If you live in Florida, you know what this is about. Goat abuse of the worst kind. Show your opposition. The goats can’t speak, they can only say Baa Means No. Speak up for the goats. Get active!”

Please Donate

I appreciate feeling appreciated. Also, money.

Currency:

Amount:

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.